HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Jesus Fucking Christ = Re...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 05:05 PM

Jesus Fucking Christ = Restoring Reason to Election Integrity Madness

It is a new affliction, stinging the crazies on both ends of the political spectrum, and they have gone wild bull-horning their beliefs, lack of evidence be damned. The election fraud meme used to force voter ID laws is the supreme example. Now, a post-election mania has filled public fora and cooler minds are having to waste time damping the fires of irrationality. Marcos says it best so far:

Anonymous claims it stopped Karl Rove from hacking the vote


Jesus Fucking Christ
Rove had nothing to do with Orca. This is idiotic. As is this stupid claim that Anonymous stopped anything.
I swear to fucking god, the "Rove was going to steal the election" bullshit is patently ridiculous. And, in fact, it's CT.
So warning here, where people might or might not see it -- I will wield the ban-hammer ruthlessly against anyone who further spreads this shit.


by kos on Sat Nov 17, 2012 - http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1162678/48471137#c642

Now this in an e-mail from Bev Harris:

OF DIVERSIONS, FABRICATIONS, AND RED HERRINGS -

My e-mail seems to have two recurring themes lately, each from the opposite side of the political spectrum. It goes like this:
"Hey, have you seen this? Anonymous claims to have hacked Karl Rove's intended election manipulation."
And this:
"Are you doing anything about the rampant voter fraud that put Obama in office?"

1. The alleged "hack" by Anonymous may or may not have been real, but if it was, a careful reading indicates that it was not a hack of voting machines, but more akin to the odious phone-jamming scheme used by a Republican operative in New Hampshire some years back. Whether you wear a blue or red political shirt, this kind of attack is nothing to brag about. It involves interfering with get out the vote efforts, and regardless of which side is working on get out the vote, obstructing such efforts is uncool.

There is no credible proof that this Anonymous hack even happened. If it did, it violated the principle of encouraging political participation. We have to be careful about stories such as this, because they can divert important work on election transparency into chasing phantoms.

2. The "rampant voter fraud" claim diverts attention from where wholesale tampering actually takes place. If you plan to rig an election, you do it as an inside job, not with alleged busloads of people casting multiple votes, and not with herds of voter impersonators fooling election judges.

You do it with absentees, you do it by manipulating who can vote, you do it by altering the voting machine counts, you do it by thwarting chain of custody. In other words, it's not the outsiders -- the voters -- where the focus needs to be. Let's keep our eye on the ball. Who handled the ballots? Who watched? Who programmed the machines? Was the list loaded into electronic pollbooks the real one? Was the count interrupted for some reason? Did any ballots disappear? Were people prevented from voting? How do we know that the ballots said to have been mailed in are the same ones that were counted, and how do we know they were put into the pool by real voters rather than an elections worker?

We need to step away from our favorite political candidates to deal with the underlying structural problem. Until we fix transparency problems, actual tampering -- considerably more damaging than anything Anonymous claimed to have done -- will happen over and over.

The real problem that we have to wrap our heads around, educate others about, and solve, is public right to see and authenticate the count.

Germany ruled that the public must be able to see and authenticate every essential step of the election, without need for special expertise, and that no after the fact procedure can be substituted for the right to authenticate the original count.

That is exactly the model we here in the USA need to work towards, but first, we have to help the public understand that public controls over our own elections are the very essence of self-government, and self-government is the basis for all democratic systems.

There are four things the public must be able to see and authenticate:
1) Who can vote (voter list)
2) Who did vote (poll list)
3) Counting of the vote
4) Chain of custody


These are the fundamental issues, and we will restore these to the American public, once we properly identify them and demand these things, with no compromise and no wasting time on side issues, half-measures, or capitulation.

You may ask what you can do to help. I love that question. It's so much better than the passive "what is being done?"

Each major civil rights movement has several stages. We are now moving from the focus group stage, where we have been learning to craft the most accurate description of the problem to be solved, in the most persuasive terms, and into the distribution stage, where we are passing the message -- quite literally -- from person to person to build momentum to help tip the scales in legal and legislative efforts.

So that's what you can do: Learn to discuss election transparency in terms of basic right to self-govern, which is the principle that is the foundation for all democratic systems. To have self-governance, you have to have real, tangible, meaningful transparency.

Specifically, "The public must be able to see and authenticate each essential step of the election, without need for special expertise, and no after-the-fact procedure can be substituted for the right to authenticate the original.

* * * * *


It is obvious who does this stuff and why.
It is tragic to see who falls for it.

24 replies, 2218 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 24 replies Author Time Post
Reply Jesus Fucking Christ = Restoring Reason to Election Integrity Madness (Original post)
Coyotl Nov 2012 OP
madamesilverspurs Nov 2012 #1
Coyotl Nov 2012 #3
PageOneQ Nov 2012 #23
WinkyDink Nov 2012 #2
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #5
Coyotl Nov 2012 #8
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #12
Coyotl Nov 2012 #13
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #14
Coyotl Nov 2012 #16
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #17
Brickbat Nov 2012 #22
Ohio Joe Nov 2012 #4
xfundy Nov 2012 #6
sulphurdunn Nov 2012 #7
longship Nov 2012 #9
Coyotl Nov 2012 #10
WinkyDink Nov 2012 #19
Coyotl Nov 2012 #21
WinkyDink Nov 2012 #24
Coyotl Nov 2012 #11
RobertEarl Nov 2012 #15
reusrename Nov 2012 #18
Coyotl Nov 2012 #20

Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 05:15 PM

1. It is irrelevant

if you are or are not a person of faith. But offending those DUers who are people of faith is hardly any way to invite them to read your OP. You'll get more views if you change your title; it offends unnecessarily and, in so doing, diminished your credibility. I'm not particularly religious, but I won't be reading your OP as long as it has that title. How about we leave the insult biz to Mitt and his little friends, hmmm?


-

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madamesilverspurs (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 05:28 PM

3. It is relevant

It says it all. And, how do you know if I am or am not "a person of faith" saying this. It is not offensive if taken as an intended expression of the extreme, and I use just such language normally for such abnormal circumstances. Lighten up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #3)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 12:12 PM

23. Words = truth

So... Agree or disagree on this particular example, I think it's wrong to cede "person of faith" or "believer" to those who choose to believe in a deity or some organized religion. I am an atheist. I am a person of faith (faith in the facts) and a believer (in reality).

No one gets to say I am not a person of faith or a believer because I simply look at faith and beliefs different from theirs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 05:21 PM

2. "you do it by altering the voting machine counts,"---Bev Harris.

"Who programmed the machines? Was the list loaded into electronic pollbooks the real one? Was the count interrupted for some reason? "---Bev Harris.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 05:33 PM

5. + 1 add Brad and the rest of the loons

In the election integrity movement

I suspect the OP, like a few here, has knickers in a twist over the mere suggestion we might have some issues that might need some fixing. The fixation is weird as well...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #5)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 07:26 PM

8. There are lots of issues that need "some fixing" as you say.

The electoral process needs an overhaul, and this JFC CT BS distracts from that. One reason to have one's "knickers in a twist" is that so many people believe the BS and don't understand the process at the same time. That is why Bev harris' comment are valuable. She does know the proces all too well and knows where the flaws in security are found.

The BS hand is waving "look over here" when we should be looking at the real hands. To do that, you need to know how everything works and connects.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #8)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 09:03 PM

12. Problem is that vote rigging is as old as the US

this is just a new version of it.

You can keep denying that... I shan't hide from history, or the present for that matter

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #12)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:35 PM

13. But one does not follow on the other

Just because vote rigging is an historical fact and recent one at that does not mean any unknown smoo on the internet can float any preposterous story without someone applying critical reasoning to their claims.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #13)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 11:00 PM

14. This is as recent as... the Republican PRIMAIRIES

this year.

But hey... have a good fantasy thinking it is not going to happen, or has not in the very recent past.

That is the problem. You need to believe that this does not happen. I know for a fact it has.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #14)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 11:43 PM

16. You are confused about what I know

I'm not a belief-based person. I'm a scientist and I know elections are rigged and I know how. I do the statistical forensics, and have produced films on it! But this story is pure BS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #16)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 11:47 PM

17. Ok

Next it will be a story about access, I suspect.

Have a good day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #5)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 08:13 AM

22. Your fixation on the delusion that people who say "this is not vote rigging" somehow means they're

saying "there is no vote rigging" is bizarre.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 05:31 PM

4. "And, in fact, it's CT" - Agreed.

But of course, people gobble it up and believe the bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 06:34 PM

6. Respectfully disagree.

As I understand it, the theory goes that Anonymous blocked the Rove monkeys. Great.

But the irrefutable fact is the machines CAN be hacked, the software is proprietary and mysterious, and repigs own all the companies.

Other countries do just fine with paper ballots. We should return to them. Counted by volunteers, in the light of day, open to public viewing, not open to Brooks Brothers fools and their circus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 07:26 PM

7. When states use voting machines

with proprietary software, that cannot be audited and that are controlled by political partisans, and when most evidence suggests that it is not unreasonable to assume the 2004 Ohio election was fixed, it seems odd to assume it wouldn't be done again or that it couldn't be stopped using the same technology used to do it in the first place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 08:08 PM

9. I have plenty of popcorn here.



Enough of this wacko conspiracy rubbish.



Ridicule is the only rational response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #9)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 08:42 PM

10. The difference between genius and stupidity is that

genius has its limits

Albert Einstein said that!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #10)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 05:14 AM

19. What did he have to say about insufferable arrogance?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #19)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 08:02 AM

21. Thast it is a certain sign

of genius

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #21)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 12:13 PM

24. Touche'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 08:57 PM

11. KOS: Fraudsters, take your shit elsewhere

"It's a big interent, and there are plenty of places that would love to have your nonsense-spewing traffic. This ain't one of them. "

Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 12:10 PM PST
Fraudsters, take your shit elsewhere by Kos
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/19/1163158/-Fraudsters-take-your-shit-elsewhere

Daily Kos is a reality based community. As such, I have a zero-tolerance policy for conspiracy theories.

So, for example, if you believe that Karl Rove was set to use a GOTV app called Orca to steal Ohio, because some random shlub on the interent claimed so (even though Orca was a Romney campaign boondoggle, and Rove ran a whole separate boondoggle Super PAC called Crossroads), then either 1) shut the fuck up about it, or 2) go spread that nonsense somewhere else. .....

As I wrote a few weeks ago:

Can we get through an election without panicking about Karl Rove's dastardly plan to steal the election? Please? Pretty please? With a cherry on top?

I'm begging you to stop that shit! You are giving Republicans far more credit and power than is warranted or than they deserve

But as for election day shenanigans? There were few, if any, just like in 2010, and 2008. That doesn't mean we stop being vigilant, but it does mean we stop acting like we are DOOOOOOMED because of a Karl Rove so incompetent, he became a national laughingstock on Fox ....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #11)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 11:19 PM

15. All it is is cyber-crime

If one wants to deny that cyber-crime never happens like that idiot Kos does, then well, they are just too dumb to converse with.

Obama won. Just like Kerry did in 2004. Only this time....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #15)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 05:11 AM

18. Exactly!

 

And Kos has members that have actually looked into the Republican primary electronic vote flipping for Romney, and they have posted extensively about it. They personally crunched the data to verify the electronic vote flipping. There is absolutely no doubt left about it.

In spite of having these home-grown folks who understand perfectly what happened, they let 'em get dogpiled and ridiculed by know-nothing science deniers.

Frankly, their whole method is digusting. If your too stoopid to comprehend the arguments, then just engage in ridicule of the folks who are desperately trying to explain it you. Who does that? Certainly not someone looking for the truth.

It's incredibly offensive. But I guess you have to have a minimum comprehension level to even understand why it's so offensive. These folks don't even meet that low threshold.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #15)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 08:01 AM

20. Kos is NOT denying that cyber crime happens. He is just saying no to CT

and I agree with him. You need to examine what he said before calling him an idiot, instead of rewriting it into a lie about him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread